Customs recovery demands need statutory authority, and an administrative order outside the Act is not appealable.

Customs staff cost could not be recovered as a "sum payable" under Section 142(1) because the Act authorised fee recovery only in the limited situation covered by Section 36, and no other provision permitted separate recovery of staff salaries from an importer, exporter, or warehouse keeper. The disputed demand therefore fell outside the statutory recovery machinery. The impugned order was also not appealable under Section 129A(1) because the bond executed under the public notice was not a bond contemplated by the Act, including Section 143, so the order was treated as administrative rather than appellate in nature. The appeal failed for want of maintainability and the recovery demand remained undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the amount claimed towards Customs staff cost was recoverable as a "sum payable" under Section 142(1) of the Customs Act, 1962; (ii) whether the impugned order was appealable under Section 129A(1) of the Customs Act, 1962.

Issue (i): whether the amount claimed towards Customs staff cost was recoverable as a "sum payable" under Section 142(1) of the Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis: The statutory scheme contained a specific provision for charging fees in the limited situation covered by Section 36 of the Customs Act, 1962. Apart from that provision, no provision in the Act authorised separate recovery of Customs staff salaries from an importer, exporter, or warehouse keeper. The amount demanded therefore lacked the character of a statutory sum recoverable under the recovery machinery of Section 142(1).

Conclusion: The disputed amount was not recoverable as a "sum payable" under Section 142(1) of the Customs Act, 1962, and this issue was decided against the Revenue.

Issue (ii): whether the impugned order was appealable under Section 129A(1) of the Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis: The bond executed pursuant to the public notice was not one of the bonds contemplated by the Act, including the bond referred to in Section 143 of the Customs Act, 1962. On that basis, the order was treated as an administrative order and not as an order falling within the appellate jurisdiction created by Section 129A(1).

Conclusion: The impugned order was not appealable under Section 129A(1) of the Customs Act, 1962, and this issue was decided against the appellant.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed at the threshold for want of maintainability, and the recovery demand was left undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: A demand is recoverable under the customs recovery provision only if it is a legally authorised sum payable under the Act, and an administrative order outside the statutory appellate framework is not appealable.

---